Daily Kos

View Story | 212 comments

  •  I agree (none / 1)

    Don't get me wrong -- I was explaining what fuels the issue for me personally. I believe wholeheartedly that the impulse to restrict access to abortion is rooted, for many people, in some kind of atavistic desire to control women's sexuality.

    But here's what those people have done. They've hidden themselves behind people like my next-door neighbor, a really kind, sweet Catholic lady who in her heart of hearts sees abortion as depriving life to a child. The frothing misogynists have appropriated that framework (though espousing violence against doctors doesn't do much for their credibility).

    I think pro-choicers have the advantage of being fairly unanimous about several frameworks: most of us are committed to feminism, and most of us are committed to children's welfare. That being the case, we can choose which one to emphasize. The feminist framework might rally the troops, but I don't think it'll win that many converts. But the children's-best-interests framework appeals to a nearly universal moral imperative -- while also forcing the right to really look at some of the situations they're so gung-ho to bring kids into, and explain how that jibes with wanting to cut welfare.

    •  You can't convert (none / 0)


      Abortion is the type of issue that you cannot convert  someone to. If someone believes its wrong to kill and believes a fetus is alive theres not much you can say to get them to support your agenda.

      And Abortion in my opinion is a medical not political issue and should be decided by the doctors and medical community in my opinion not politicians.

      Where you won't win with abortion is the moral debate, you cannot convince someone its morally right to kill unless they already believe this and its the same as trying to convince people of the death penalty.

      •  Actually, it's not always that hard. (none / 0)

        You'd be surprised how many people take a position because of their peer group rather than deep philosophical thought.  

        My ex-wife has a police record from being arrested while engaging in protest for Operation Rescue.  She had to serve community service.  She was very involved in the San Pedro evangelical community at the time.  Even made TV appearances.

        After we became married, she changed her views.  I'd like to say that it's because I'm such a persuasive speaker, but, actually, I tried to respect her views while just expressing my disagreement.  

        I think what made the difference was the loss of her peer group.  Religious groups have very strong peer-reinforcement of beliefs among their members.   When that becomes extended to political views, it can be a mighty force.

        Her church, by the way, was headed by the brother of Bush 41's INS department head, Harold Ezell.

View Story | 212 comments